Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Oneness’ Category

On my walk at the waterfront this cool evening, a conversation floated into my field, happening between the fellow walkers right in my trail, behind me, such that I could hear them clearly but not see who they are, unless I turned around to look.

“…but if you’re rejecting rejection…” came in the voice of a young child, evidently stumbling to understand. “Yeah… what do you think about that?” asked an adult male, parental and patient in their tone. “Mmm… well, I was wondering, if you’re rejecting rejection, then what are you doing?” “Yes, if you’re rejecting rejection…” prompted a female adult, clearly the mom, also apparently good at allowing the child to find their own way. “Why don’t you give us a workshop on this subject,” said the father encouragingly, “Or at least a class?” The child giggled, but returned to the struggle, “See if you’re rejecting rejection, then you’re rejecting, right?” (more…)

Read Full Post »

When I use the word ‘spontaneous’ (in the context of spontaneous action), I mean non-premeditated, yes. I also mean non-motivated, meaning, with no motive (or control) of an end-result or outcome.

Say you see someone hurt in the middle of the street and you are called to spontaneously run over and assist them to the side. Look closely and clearly, and it can be seen that the action does not have a thoughtful aim in that moment; the action is simply a natural response. Once done, the thought arises that it was to ‘help’ them. Whether your action was ultimately helpful or unhelpful is a perspective-based judgment (call),* and in any case, a side-effect. The spontaneous action itself is actually free of such perspective!  (more…)

Read Full Post »

Suffering and sadhana are ultimately the same thing 😊 Suffering is to attach to wants and identify with thoughts, and sadhana (rigorous penance) is to try to detach from wants and dis-identify with thoughts by controlling the mind, body or breath… and to want not to want is also a want, another form of suffering! Both ultimately bring a realization of utter futility, and one may just find oneself on the ‘middle path’ — the path that cannot be followed. The no-path path of the here-and-now, the path that promises not to get you anywhere and promises only to get you no-thing.

Read Full Post »

It’s entirely possible to acknowledge and care deeply about the effect (and its associated pain/suffering) while realizing that the source/cause is always within. In true Realization, one is neither apathetic to the effect, nor motivated to act via identifying with the effect… only responding spontaneously as (guided in) source/cause!

The guidance to look within is not remotely to tell someone that what they’re experiencing is not what they’re experiencing (“gaslighting”) or to fault them for the experience (“victim blaming”), but to reveal that what they’re experiencing as an effect cannot ultimately be understood independently or separately from the source (within). It is not to deny the effect and its pain/suffering at all, but to see that to objectify the effect, become identified with it, and put all energy and action outwardly on it, is precisely to continue to suffer it.  (more…)

Read Full Post »

What has been conceptualized (misconstrued) as ”generosity” or “tolerance” or “acceptance” of “other religions” and their “beliefs” in Hinduism, is actually not those things at all. The intellectual concept of tolerance or acceptance traces to the (Vedic) realization that every apparent “person” and concomitant set of beliefs is only a unique and reductive play of universal God/consciousness in a leela, a play with a plot. Such that, backstage (in Reality), the villain, victim and the hero are actors (Atman in the field of Brahman), who merrily walk off hand-in-hand to have chai after entertaining and bowing to their audience (who are also actors in other costumes)!

So, when someone of a particular religion says, only my prophet brings the word of God, or only my savior is son of God, or in my religion we believe this or that about our dead ancestors, the realized hindu (who is not “a Hindu” in identity but in realized consciousness) is neither remotely conflicted, nor needs to “accept” or “tolerate” or “be secular.” It is intrinsic to “Vedic” realization to simply see: Vaah! Kya baat hai! How wonderful! Look how beautifully God/consciousness is playing here!! Look how God/consciousness has chosen to temporarily costume and define, limit and forget its total Godness in this unique instance, to dance the dance of creation! (more…)

Read Full Post »

What is consciousness? That within which all experience arises, that by which all experience is made (expressed), and that with which all experience is known.

Consciousness is ubiquitously referenced (without realizing it) as I, mystically referenced as You/Beloved, and religiously referenced as God.

What is experience? That which is (apparently) objective, that is, can (apparently) be separated out. If it is limited, measurable, nameable or identifiable, it is experience, created with and within consciousness, but is not consciousness. Just like the image in the mirror is not the mirror, the reflection in the pond is not the pond, the line in the sand is not the sand, the wave in the ocean is not the ocean…  (more…)

Read Full Post »

Whenever I speak of no-mind, I’m not speaking of the absence of mind, but the absence of identification with it. The absence of conceiving of it as a separate entity — a me. Mind is not an entity; it is the movement, the activity arising (and passing) in/as consciousness. So, no-mind points to no clinging to it as a finite, limited (and limiting) identity or entity, so it is allowed to dissolve into/as Source just as easily as it arises within/as Source! This easy arising and dissolving lends fluidity and transparency, that we commonly attempt to convey when we refer to “an open mind.” (more…)

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »